Why Won't They Listen?

By this time, we've all witnessed some kind of media report about computer hackers.  Whether it's the piece in your newspaper about kids with computers figuring out how to make free phone calls or the special report on television that shows how hackers can gain access to secret corporate computer networks, the angle is almost always the same.  And it usually misses the most important points: What kind of data is being stored?  Why is it so easy to gain access?  And why is there so much gross negligence?

Bearing this in mind, we thought it would be a good idea to bring a couple of stories to the public eye.  We felt it was important to share them not only with our readers, but with everyone.  And by communicating directly with the press, we could avoid any misconceptions.  In fact, the whole thing could be an educational experience.

Our first story concerned easy access to U.S. military computer systems.  Over the past few years, Dutch hackers have been able to get into all kinds of systems.  This is not because they're necessarily better than American hackers.  But they do live in a healthier society where curiosity and exploration are encouraged, not punished.  We asked them to show us on videotape just how easy it was to get into a military system.  They graciously did this and even we were surprised at how easy it was.

By going to the media and showing them this, we thought that hackers might finally be seen in a better light.  After all, with knowledge of military weaknesses, there are plenty of places these hackers could go.  But they didn't.  They chose to share the information.

Our other story concerned push-button locks that are appearing everywhere we look.  And while technically this had nothing to do with computers, the similarities were astounding.  Here we have a gadget that is supposed to provide security.  The average person looks at it and believes what they're told, in much the same way they would believe what a computer tells them without question.  But hackers discovered that there was something seriously wrong here.  The upshot of our story was that these locks were not locks at all, but open invitations to disaster.

Again, going to the media with this story seemed the proper course of action.  Instead of using this knowledge for our own gains, we realized that people had to be warned before it was too late.  These locks, which have been used in businesses and offices for years, are now being installed in homes.  We knew the media would understand the threat.

What can we say?  We were wrong.  Despite a massive effort on our part to get every media outlet in the country involved in these stories, the interest we received back was negligible.  We held a press conference in New York City, made hundreds of phone calls, did tons of research, and are still paying the bills for it.  And it's likely you never heard a single word about it.  They decided it just wasn't something the American people needed to hear.

Ironically, in subsequent weeks there were stories in the media of Dutch hackers invading computers yet again.  The same old angles.  No mention of the efforts of hackers to safeguard these systems.  That just wasn't newsworthy.

We think things will change when computer systems with sensitive information are accessed by malevolent people who know what they're doing.  They'll change when homes, offices, schools, and mailboxes around the nation are broken into without a trace.  We believe that then and only then, the media will take an interest.  And, of course, they'll probably decide to blame us.  The ratings and circulation will go through the roof.

We did our best to warn the American public of two distinct dangers.  It's now up to our readers to spread the word where the media won't.